Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds no further behavioral details. It does not explain the effect of the 'contract' parameter from the schema, nor does it mention any side effects or return behavior beyond what annotations already imply.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence without unnecessary words, but it is too vague to be fully effective. It earns its place in terms of brevity but lacks substantive clarification.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description does not explain what the tool returns or how it behaves in typical usage. The schema parameter description hints at a contract mode, but the tool description itself leaves out critical context for an agent to understand the full operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers the single 'contract' parameter with a clear description, and the tool description adds no extra meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Identify services connected through PCD' gives a vague sense of listing or finding services but does not explicitly state that it returns a list of connections. It is somewhat distinguishable from sibling tools like connection_browse or connection_call, but the purpose could be clearer.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as connection_browse or connection_call. There is no mention of suitable scenarios or conditions for selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.